Full Version: Dean vs. the DCCC
Turns out that Rahm Emanuel left a meeting in a huff over party strategy. Since being elected to the DNC chief post, Dean has promsied a comprehensive fifty state strategy. As part of this strategy, field organizers have been hired to work in some big time red states, such as mine in order to build up county parties, as well as to find good people to run for various offices. Needless to say, Emanuel believes that this is a waste of money and that with the democrats on the precipice of retaking the House, that they money could be better spent elsewhere. I will say that as the chair of a county in a big red state, I've met with a newly hired organizer and the party here is getting better. Two years ago, we were in shambles and things appear to be t urning around. I think Dean deserves credit for building up a more powerful stateparty where once, one didn't exist.
Article.
Questions for debate:
1.)Is Howard Dean spending too much money and ultimately hurting the democratic cause?
2.)Is the strategy to spend money in red states a waste of time?
3.)Is this an example of east coast party elites wanting to forget about the rest of us west of the Mississippi?
Article.
QUOTE
Although Dean has proved to be a more impressive fundraiser than some skeptical Democrats once thought -- the DNC has taken in $74 million since the start of this election cycle in 2005 -- he has also been a prolific spender. Disclosure forms for the first quarter of this year showed the party with about $10 million in cash on hand. The Republican National Committee, by contrast, has raised just under $142 million this cycle and has about $43 million on hand.
Many Washington Democrats think Dean is unwise to spend on field organizers and other staff in states where House and Senate candidates have little chance of winning. Dean has maintained that the party cannot strengthen itself over the long haul unless it competes everywhere.
At a recent breakfast meeting with reporters, Dean said he has crafted a long-term business plan "and we are going to execute it." He also said, "We need to be a national party again, and I think we have to run on a message that can appeal to people in Alabama as well as it can appeal to people in New York." He declined to be interviewed for this article.
Many Washington Democrats think Dean is unwise to spend on field organizers and other staff in states where House and Senate candidates have little chance of winning. Dean has maintained that the party cannot strengthen itself over the long haul unless it competes everywhere.
At a recent breakfast meeting with reporters, Dean said he has crafted a long-term business plan "and we are going to execute it." He also said, "We need to be a national party again, and I think we have to run on a message that can appeal to people in Alabama as well as it can appeal to people in New York." He declined to be interviewed for this article.
Questions for debate:
1.)Is Howard Dean spending too much money and ultimately hurting the democratic cause?
2.)Is the strategy to spend money in red states a waste of time?
3.)Is this an example of east coast party elites wanting to forget about the rest of us west of the Mississippi?
1.)Is Howard Dean spending too much money and ultimately hurting the democratic cause?
Not at all. The party should represent America, not just the blue and potentially purple states.
2.)Is the strategy to spend money in red states a waste of time?
It depends on if we sustain it. If this energy leaves when Dean leaves the DNC, then it likely would be a waste. I listened to an interview with him on the Majority Report recently. He was dead on when talking about the approach of starting local in order to think national. Get seats on the city council, the school boards, the Mayor's office, then focus on Congress, the Governor, etc.
Unfortunately America has become the society of instant gratification, and this isn't a problem that remedies itself with short term infusions of capital and energy. Yes, we need to focus on 2006, but keep the horizon in our sights, not just the next port of call.
3.)Is this an example of east coast party elites wanting to forget about the rest of us west of the Mississippi?
No, I think Rahm's heart is in the right place, but luckily Dean is the one steering the ship. We can't think tactically (2006) only. We must think strategically. 2006 elections are but one piece of the puzzle. If we win the battle in 2006, but lose the war (future elections), what's the point?
Not at all. The party should represent America, not just the blue and potentially purple states.
2.)Is the strategy to spend money in red states a waste of time?
It depends on if we sustain it. If this energy leaves when Dean leaves the DNC, then it likely would be a waste. I listened to an interview with him on the Majority Report recently. He was dead on when talking about the approach of starting local in order to think national. Get seats on the city council, the school boards, the Mayor's office, then focus on Congress, the Governor, etc.
Unfortunately America has become the society of instant gratification, and this isn't a problem that remedies itself with short term infusions of capital and energy. Yes, we need to focus on 2006, but keep the horizon in our sights, not just the next port of call.
3.)Is this an example of east coast party elites wanting to forget about the rest of us west of the Mississippi?
No, I think Rahm's heart is in the right place, but luckily Dean is the one steering the ship. We can't think tactically (2006) only. We must think strategically. 2006 elections are but one piece of the puzzle. If we win the battle in 2006, but lose the war (future elections), what's the point?
QUOTE
He was dead on when talking about the approach of starting local in order to think national. Get seats on the city council, the school boards, the Mayor's office, then focus on Congress, the Governor, etc.
I think Dean is right on with that mindset. The problem where I live is that a lot of those local and state races go uncontested against the republicans. County assessor? ounty clerk? Not necessarily sexy positions that everyone gets excited about and runs for, but they are necessary as stepping stones and as experience building practical positions that are necessary before one can become a senator or anything like that later on. I don't believe the DCCC recogognizes that fact, even if their mission is just to raise a heap full of money from the hamptons house party go'ers, not necessarily from us hicks out in the boondocks.
QUOTE
If we win the battle in 2006, but lose the war (future elections), what's the point?
And that is the problem with Rahm Emanuel's thinking. These people believe that a Hillary Clinton or a Barack Obama will be THE answer to our problems. They'll get elected and then they'll be the tide that lifts the boats of all other house and senate candidates. That can happen to an extent, but that is not how a party is built up. The GOP is powerful as they are reaping the rewards of spending the '70s and '80s organizing at the grassroots level through groups like the moral majority, christian coalition, as well as in creating various think tanks. They didn't put their eggs all in one presidential hopeful and presto!.
So they see money going to the red states rather than to races and now they're upset. I've got news for them though. Montana has a democratic governor-you get people like that by helping the state party. I'm sorry, I really believe the DCCC really has their heads on backwards in regards to this. I get their mailings all the time and just pitch it due to my disgust with them. Hillary Clinton doesn't need to write me a letter to ask me to donate to the DCCC. The hamptons crowd and people like Ted Turner will take care of that. I'll keep my money in my state and support local and state candidates instead.
Before a race is in invested in, it should be determined that it is winnable. No point in wasting dough on some position in a solid Republican stronghold with a popular incumbent. At the sametime however, assessments of whether or not races can be won, cannot be soley based upon, oh that states red, oh that one's blue. We win plenty of positions in supposedly die hard conservative areas, and if we didn't, then control of the senate would never even be contested, and we would always be on the defensive in our home turf.
Money distribution should not be egalatarian, but it should be decided by careful case by case assessment rather then broad generalizations of regions.
Money distribution should not be egalatarian, but it should be decided by careful case by case assessment rather then broad generalizations of regions.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.